Pages: 1 ... 34 35 36 [37] 38 39 40 ... 109   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Trust look to buy the CG  (Read 382021 times)
Bogus Dave
Ate my own dick

Offline Offline

Posts: 16337





Ignore
« Reply #540 on: Friday, March 23, 2018, 12:57:27 »

I’d be suprised if Andrew Steele Davis posted anything STFC related tbf
Logged

Things get better but they never get good
Peter Venkman
We don't need no stinking badges.

Offline Offline

Posts: 58862


Back Off Man, I’m A Scientist.



« Reply #541 on: Friday, March 23, 2018, 14:12:13 »

What the fuck are they planning at the Town End that's going to cost £15m, Stevenage are building a new end stand at the moment and the budget is c.£1m, been trying to get a figure for the works at Exeter but struggling (incidentally have they bought part of Barnet's ground to re-erect?)

Its not as if the car park is very big for any form of enabling development, but that £15m seems bloody high to me?

£15m seems astronomical cost for a single stand, here are a few other ground/rebuild costs I can find on the net.

Stevenage new stand capacity 1,700 cost £1.2m

Exeter City new stand capacity of 1,600 cost £3.5m

Yeovil whole ground £3.5m 9,500 capacity (in 1990)

Bristol City whole ground capacity 27,000 improvements cost £29-40m (depending on source)

Bristol Rovers whole ground improvement 16,000 capacity cost £35m

Oxford Kassam stadium capacity 12,500 cost £15m for 3 stands! (in 2001)

Plymouth Argyle new stand 5,000 capacity cost £5m (opening 2019)
Logged

Only a fool does not know when to hold his tongue.
RobertT

Offline Offline

Posts: 11646




Ignore
« Reply #542 on: Friday, March 23, 2018, 14:12:54 »

This is the problem with not already having someone on-board who is driving this as their full time occupation.  In their infographic they mention getting a team on-board once purchased - too late, you need to have been using the funds to get someone in now.

Part of the issue they are facing is, yes, they have sent "communications", but they haven't been able to articulate the plan.  The NDA is a killer for them I am afraid.  Maybe for a few weeks it's ok, but they re a Community group and not being able to reveal the source of funding promotes all kinds of trust issues (pun intended).  I'd be hard at work right now convincing the backers to allow this to be removed-  if they don't, I do not see them  getting any funding to match.

Next, they need a skeleton business case out in the open, showing how they intend to use funds, apportion income, fund development and outline timelines etc.  Essentially we are all the potential shareholders, we need to be convinced to provide funding, not begged at.  I very much doubt they will raise a million by just asking for it on some vague hope.

It's a shame because this was a great opportunity.

The 15m Town End is a good example.  Don't just float such vague ideas around, provide an outline as to how it is being funded (don't even need names at this point), how it will provide increased income for the Trust and how that will then flow to help the club.  What is the scale of the development? What does it incorporate - that again can be as vague as xxxxx sq ft of commercial space for lease and we are in early negotiations with proposed tenants etc.  Maybe a theme of where the tenants come from - sports retail, hospitality etc.  Early indications as to when it could commence, how it will impact matchday's and for what period.
Logged
RobertT

Offline Offline

Posts: 11646




Ignore
« Reply #543 on: Friday, March 23, 2018, 14:15:29 »

£15m seems astronomical cost for a single stand, here are a few other ground/rebuild costs I can find on the net.

Stevenage new stand capacity 1,700 cost £1.2m

Exeter City new stand capacity of 1,600 cost £3.5m

Yeovil whole ground £3.5m 9,500 capacity (in 1990)

Bristol City whole ground capacity 27,000 improvements cost £29-40m (depending on source)

Bristol Rovers whole ground improvement 16,000 capacity cost £35m

Oxford Kassam stadium capacity 12,500 cost £15m for 3 stands! (in 2001)

Plymouth Argyle new stand 5,000 capacity cost £5m (opening 2019)

It depends on the source funding and the extra facilities required to get such parties interested.
Logged
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia

Offline Offline

Posts: 34913





Ignore
« Reply #544 on: Friday, March 23, 2018, 14:31:55 »

It's a shame because this was a great opportunity.

Let's face it, the willl to fight for the club's future just isn't there any longer.

Now it's just  Shrug  and hope that Power can find someone benign to sell up to.
Logged
Batch
Not a Batch

Online Online

Posts: 55159





Ignore
« Reply #545 on: Friday, March 23, 2018, 14:40:33 »

Quote from: Reg Smeeton
Quote
It's a shame because this was a great opportunity.
Let's face it, the willl to fight for the club's future just isn't there any longer.

Now it's just  Shrug  and hope that Power can find someone benign to sell up to.


I don't think you can say that until the is obvious peril (which granted may be too late in the case of a ground sale).

with Diamandis there was an obvious tangible threat of the debenture.

today there are a few 'power is ruining us' FB posts, but no actual evidence.

Don't like the bloke myself, but not going to act on nothing more than a guy feeling
Logged
pauld
Aaron Aardvark

Offline Offline

Posts: 25436


Absolute Calamity!




Ignore
« Reply #546 on: Friday, March 23, 2018, 14:42:27 »

Let's face it, the willl to fight for the club's future just isn't there any longer.
That isn't what people are saying though, that's just your thesis. What people are actually saying is that the plans as communicated are too vague or they don't think they will work, not that they can't be bothered.
Logged
horlock07

Offline Offline

Posts: 18726


Lives in Northern Bastard Outpost




Ignore
« Reply #547 on: Friday, March 23, 2018, 14:43:55 »

This is the problem with not already having someone on-board who is driving this as their full time occupation.  In their infographic they mention getting a team on-board once purchased - too late, you need to have been using the funds to get someone in now.


They really don't, to use a local example the Gloucestershire and Warwickshire Railway have reconstructed and reopened 13 miles of heritage railway without any paid staff, its all volunteers (I think so, it was until very recently anyway) most recently raising £1.3m to extend to Broadway via share offers etc https://www.gwsr.com/supporting_the_railway/shares/broadway_-_the_last_mile.html I have nothing to do with them, although I know people who do and they manage this through volunteer time.

Part of the issue they are facing is, yes, they have sent "communications", but they haven't been able to articulate the plan.  The NDA is a killer for them I am afraid.  Maybe for a few weeks it's ok, but they re a Community group and not being able to reveal the source of funding promotes all kinds of trust issues (pun intended).  I'd be hard at work right now convincing the backers to allow this to be removed-  if they don't, I do not see them  getting any funding to match.


Entirely agree with this, its someone donating to a bleeding community group, not taking over Nationwide (to keep it local), seems entirely unnecessary and instead sets all manner of hares running about having something to hide?

Next, they need a skeleton business case out in the open, showing how they intend to use funds, apportion income, fund development and outline timelines etc.  Essentially we are all the potential shareholders, we need to be convinced to provide funding, not begged at.  I very much doubt they will raise a million by just asking for it on some vague hope.

It's a shame because this was a great opportunity.


Again entirely agree, to share another example of a mainly volunteer group trying to raise cash, and its another heritage railway one as they tend to be the sort of volunteer projects I am aware of (plus it keeps Reg happy!) http://www.vintagetrains.co.uk/uploads/Documents/VT%20Share%20Document.pdf again gives you some confidence of what you are giving money to, how its going to be spent and a plan going forward.
Logged
Mightymyte
SECRET SQUIRREL

Offline Offline

Posts: 4




Ignore
« Reply #548 on: Friday, March 23, 2018, 14:52:34 »

Hi,

My name is Steve Mytton - on Twitter as Mightymyte, so have used that here. I am the Chairman of TrustSTFC (5th Anniversary next week on Tuesday 27th March 2018), so I can hopefully answer your questions...

Please be kind  Cheesy

Fully take on board that our communication has been patchy, that's mainly because of delays in the council process (prior to this CG campaign our newsletter was every month without fail). I think some of the accusations are a bit harsh as there are very specific questions being asked in some cases, and maybe our responses on twitter (for instance) are dismissed as generic when in fact they are just an attempt to summarise without writing an essay. Anyone that attended the AGM or previous fan meetings will know that we give detailed answers (I rabbit on far too much actually, I'm working on that).

I have responded to hundreds of emails over the five years (often in great detail), and you are always able to email directly at info@truststfc.com - nothing gets ignored, and everything gets a response. Sometimes there might be a delay, but that's because I am a working man - up at 5:30am each day and commuting, father of two young kids, husband to a very understanding wife, and have a dog that needs walking every evening.

We have a fantastic Trust board who are involved in many discussions, but not necessarily all of them, so it's hard to get others to answer the fine detail that many questions demand. There are forums like this, and others in Facebook, and of course there is Twitter too. It's not easy to cover all of the angles, but we are continually trying.

At the AGM we brought James Spencer on-board (he contacted us and volunteered his services, we are always appealing for more helpers by the way). James is a fantastic addition and is going to take the lead on the TrustSTFC.tv website which was created for comms purposes but has fallen to the wayside as our previous Administrator (Sam Morshead) got himself a new job, got married, and had less time to spare. James is hopefully going to work with Sam and get the site moving again, so we would welcome your contributions/ideas.

We are looking into doing a regular podcast (or something similar) as this may work better than the written word. We may also continue with infographics, it worked really well at the AGM (check out our site if you have not already) and everyone who came along went away better informed, we took loads of questions and it was a brilliant two-way interaction all night.

Anyway, all of our current comms and methods are not working for some of you so I'm willing to take it on the chin and accept that, for the moment at least, we have not covered all the bases.

I've tried looking through this thread but the topics vary and it's more of a chat than a questions thing at the moment. I am in meetings for much of the remainder of the day today, and I'm catching up on a busy week after preparing for, presenting at and writing up the AGM. Can I suggest that the questions are collated either here or in a different thread, over the next day or two, and then I will come back on at the weekend and answer them?

Please keep in mind that nobody gets paid for this Trust work, and over the years we have put in hundreds/maybe thousands of hours (family time) in an attempt to make something worthwhile happen. We are not looking for medals or heaps of praise, but a little understanding. We get lots of appreciative emails and support, and contributions, but I know to some people we are still a mysterious organisation. We're not - you're all welcome to join in at any time.

Doing all of this via social media/the web is very time consuming and hence why we encourage people to come to the AGM. It really was great, really positive and everyone walked away with a clear view.  We had loads of questions, and answered them in detail, I would encourage you to come along to any future meetings, it helps everyone.

There are loads of Q&As in here, both from this year and last year... http://truststfc.tv/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/2018-AGM-Pack.pdf

So please get the questions together, and aside from the NDA stuff (yes it's real) I will do my best to answer.

As it's the Town End forum, I might even drop in the odd swear word  Smiley

Thanks,
Steve
 
Stephen Mytton
Chairman, TrustSTFC
 
Twitter: @mightymyte / @TrustSTFC
Facebook: facebook.com/truststfc
www.redarmyfund.co.uk  www.truststfc.tv








 
Logged
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia

Offline Offline

Posts: 34913





Ignore
« Reply #549 on: Friday, March 23, 2018, 14:54:42 »

That isn't what people are saying though, that's just your thesis. What people are actually saying is that the plans as communicated are too vague or they don't think they will work, not that they can't be bothered.

Then presumably if they could be bothered they'd get engaged and try and do something about the perceived weaknesses of the case. That's assuming they think the Trust owning the ground is a good thing.... reading the posts on here plenty don't think that is the case, and would prefer Mr Power.
Logged
RobertT

Offline Offline

Posts: 11646




Ignore
« Reply #550 on: Friday, March 23, 2018, 15:04:59 »

I helped PaulD create an entire ground redevelopment proposal on the back of packet of fags 10 years ago, what more do you want :-)

Mytte - to summarise - it is not volume or regularity of Comms, it is who to and content.  It is not that we think you are not working hard, it is in-fact that you haven't been able to articulate a business plan.  It is not that nobody knows who you are - it is that they do not know who the funding is coming from and whether you like it or not, that is a problem for you.

To take the issue 10 years ago, and yes it was much more compelling, it worked because it was simple.  A) we do not want this guy, b) we'd like this guy, c) we are happy with this other guy just sell
Logged
pauld
Aaron Aardvark

Offline Offline

Posts: 25436


Absolute Calamity!




Ignore
« Reply #551 on: Friday, March 23, 2018, 15:29:17 »

Then presumably if they could be bothered they'd get engaged and try and do something about the perceived weaknesses of the case. That's assuming they think the Trust owning the ground is a good thing.... reading the posts on here plenty don't think that is the case, and would prefer Mr Power.
But people not thinking the Trust owning the ground is a good thing does not equate to people can't be bothered to fight for the club's future. You might equate the two, and personally I agree that the Trust owning the ground does much to secure the club's future whereas Power (or AN Other Owner) holding it raises the spectre of real threats to the club in the future, but plenty of people don't. And that's a perfectly coherent view, as has been set out quite cogently by several posters in this thread, theakston and DRS among others. They both very much care about the club's future they just don't agree with your analysis of how best to secure it.
Logged
derbystfc

Offline Offline

Posts: 474




Ignore
« Reply #552 on: Friday, March 23, 2018, 15:29:28 »

I helped PaulD create an entire ground redevelopment proposal on the back of packet of fags 10 years ago, what more do you want :-)

Mytte - to summarise - it is not volume or regularity of Comms, it is who to and content.  It is not that we think you are not working hard, it is in-fact that you haven't been able to articulate a business plan.  It is not that nobody knows who you are - it is that they do not know who the funding is coming from and whether you like it or not, that is a problem for you.

To take the issue 10 years ago, and yes it was much more compelling, it worked because it was simple.  A) we do not want this guy, b) we'd like this guy, c) we are happy with this other guy just sell

It's a bit like the Scottish referendum, they had all these ideas, but it felt like a bit pie in the sky, there was a lot a vague ideas. (not Scottish, I just used it as an example).

To promote engagement, people need to feel a part of the plan, the more info you can put out (within reason), the more engaged people will get. Fulfil the points that RobT outlined, and more will feel more informed.

Some people have had 30 years or more of vagueness from STFC related people, probably feel like they just had enough of it now

Logged
Wobbly Bob

Offline Offline

Posts: 4129





Ignore
« Reply #553 on: Friday, March 23, 2018, 15:41:49 »

It's a bit like the Scottish referendum, they had all these ideas, but it felt like a bit pie in the sky, there was a lot a vague ideas. (not Scottish, I just used it as an example).

To promote engagement, people need to feel a part of the plan, the more info you can put out (within reason), the more engaged people will get. Fulfil the points that RobT outlined, and more will feel more informed.

Some people have had 30 years or more of vagueness from STFC related people, probably feel like they just had enough of it now


Nowt wrong with some vagueness.

Logged

Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Crap!
theakston2k

Offline Offline

Posts: 5301




Ignore
« Reply #554 on: Friday, March 23, 2018, 15:55:43 »

I just think the Trust are missing their opportunity (personal views on whether it is my personal choice aside). To me this is the calm before the storm, you have to assume at some point the club will release their own vision if for no other reason than to put people off giving the Trust their money. I would have thought the Trust would be doing all they can to get people on board whilst they can before the club really enter the mix.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 34 35 36 [37] 38 39 40 ... 109   Go Up
Print
Jump to: